Smt. Geetika Agarwal vs. Deputy Commissioner Sales Tax And 2 Others
Held
The Court held that the petitioner possessed a statutory remedy of appeal against the order dated 22.04.2022. The petitioner's counsel informed the Court of the petitioner's decision to withdraw the writ petition to avail this appellate remedy. Consequently, without delving into the merits of the petitioner's case, the Court dismissed the writ petition as withdrawn. The petitioner was granted liberty to pursue their appeal before the appropriate appellate authority under the provisions of the U.P. VAT Act read with Section 107 of the CGST Act, 2017. No opinion was expressed by the Court on the merits of the petitioner's claim.
Facts
The petitioner, Smt. Geetika Agarwal, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad challenging an order dated 22.04.2022 passed by the respondent no.1, the Deputy Commissioner Sales Tax. This order denied the petitioner a refund of interest. The petitioner was represented by Senior Advocate Sri Atul Dayal and Sri Praveen Kumar Singh. The respondent was represented by Sri Apoorva Hajela, learned Standing Counsel. The Court noted that the petitioner had a statutory remedy of appeal under the U.P. VAT Act read with Section 107 of the CGST Act, 2017.
Key Issues
1. Whether the petitioner has an alternative statutory remedy of appeal against the order dated 22.04.2022 denying refund of interest, as provided under the U.P. VAT Act read with Section 107 of the CGST Act, 2017? Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner, through their counsel, stated their intention to withdraw the writ petition to pursue the appeal remedy before the appellate authority against the order dated 22.04.2022. Respondent's Contention: The respondent, through the learned Standing Counsel, did not present any arguments on the merits of the case but was present to represent the authorities.
Sections Cited
Section 107
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Court No. - 3 Case :- WRIT TAX No. - 1010 of 2022 Petitioner :- Smt. Geetika Agarwal Respondent :- Deputy Commissioner Sales Tax And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Lal Mani Singh,Praveen Kumar Singh,Sr. Advocate Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Surya Prakash Kesarwani,J. Hon'ble Jayant Banerji,J. Heard Sri Atul Dayal, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri Praveen Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Apoorva Hajela, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent no.
This writ petition has been filed praying to quash the order dated 22.04.2022 whereby refund of interest has been denied by the respondent no.
Petitioner has remedy of appeal under the provision of U.P. VAT Act read with Section 107 of CGST Act, 2017. Learned counsel for the petitioner now states that petitioner wants to withdraw this writ petition to challenge the order dated 22.04.2022 in Appeal before the appellate authority. In view of the aforesaid and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case of the petitioner, this writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to petitioner to avail remedy of appeal under the provision of U.P. VAT Act read with Section 107 of
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Allahabad High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.